In the Matter of the Involuntary Termination of the Parent-Child Relationship of D.A. Jr. (Minor Child) S.G. (Mother), and D.J.A. (Father) v. The Indiana Department of Child Services (mem. dec.)
33A05-1610-JT-2501
| Ind. Ct. App. | Apr 7, 2017Background
- DCS filed to involuntarily terminate Mother (S.G.) and Father (D.J.A.) parental rights to D.A. Jr., born April 2, 2015; child was removed July 17, 2015 and not returned.
- Removal reasons: Mother’s methamphetamine use and inability to safely care for the infant; Father was incarcerated at removal.
- CHINS proceedings resulted in case plan requirements (substance treatment, case management, housing, visitation). Both parents failed to comply: Mother submitted positive drug screens, failed to complete treatment, and missed services; Father tested positive for methamphetamine, had periods of incarceration, and did not engage in services when not in custody.
- Child has lived primarily with foster care and maternal grandmother since August 2015; maternal grandmother seeks to adopt. CASA/FCM supported termination and adoption for permanency.
- Trial court found clear and convincing evidence that (1) there is a reasonable probability the removal conditions will not be remedied, (2) termination is in the child’s best interests, and (3) DCS had a satisfactory plan (adoption by maternal grandmother); parental rights were terminated.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there is a reasonable probability the conditions leading to removal will not be remedied | Mother/Father: DCS failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that conditions won’t be remedied | DCS: Parents’ continued drug use, criminality, nonparticipation in services, and incarceration show low likelihood of remediation | Court: Affirmed — evidence supports reasonable probability of nonremedial conditions |
| Whether termination is in the child’s best interests | Mother/Father: Termination not shown to be best for child | DCS: Child needs permanency; child bonded to grandmother; parents unstable | Court: Affirmed — totality of evidence (FCM/CASA testimony, bonding, instability) supports best-interests finding |
| Whether DCS was required to provide services to incarcerated father (due process claim) | Father: Incarceration prevented meaningful participation; denial of services violated due process | DCS: No statutory due-process entitlement to services for incarcerated parent; father failed to request or pursue services when able | Court: Waived on appeal; alternatively meritless — no due process violation and father failed to seek services |
| Sufficiency of findings challenged by Mother | Mother: Certain factual findings unsupported | DCS/Court: Unchallenged findings independently support ultimate conclusions | Court: Even omitting contested portions, remaining findings support termination; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.P., 882 N.E.2d 799 (Ind. Ct. App.) (purpose of termination is child protection; termination is last resort)
- In re G.Y., 904 N.E.2d 1257 (Ind.) (DCS must prove elements by clear and convincing evidence)
- C.A. v. Ind. Dep’t of Child Servs., 15 N.E.3d 85 (Ind. Ct. App.) (deferential appellate review in termination cases)
- K.T.K. v. Ind. Dep’t of Child Servs., 989 N.E.2d 1225 (Ind.) (two-step analysis to determine whether removal conditions will be remedied)
- In re I.A., 934 N.E.2d 1132 (Ind.) (framework for assessing probability conditions will not be remedied)
- In re E.M., 4 N.E.3d 636 (Ind.) (balance recent improvements against habitual conduct)
- Lang v. Starke Cty. Office of Family & Children, 861 N.E.2d 366 (Ind. Ct. App.) (unwillingness to cooperate plus unchanged conditions supports nonremedial finding)
- In re Kay L., 867 N.E.2d 236 (Ind. Ct. App.) (DCS need not rule out all possibilities of change)
- McBride v. Monroe Cty. Office of Family & Children, 798 N.E.2d 185 (Ind. Ct. App.) (child’s best interests require subordinating parental interests)
- Castro v. State Office of Family & Children, 842 N.E.2d 367 (Ind. Ct. App.) (no per se due process right to services for incarcerated parent)
- In re B.D.J., 728 N.E.2d 195 (Ind. Ct. App.) (termination may occur without DCS-provided services if statutory elements are met)
- In re C.M., 675 N.E.2d 1134 (Ind. Ct. App.) (court need not wait for irreversible harm before terminating parental rights)